Seven Network (Operations) Ltd v Dowling

Seven Network (Operations) Ltd sought the recusal of a judge who had presided over a defamation case against the company, on the basis that the judge had made disparaging statements about the company and other judges. The Court of Appeal was asked to determine whether the judge should recuse himself due to apprehended bias. The legal issues included whether the statements made by the applicant had created an apprehension that the judge might not decide the case on its merits, and whether the application for recusal should be transferred to another court. The Court held that the statements made by the applicant did not lead to an apprehension that the judge might decide the case other than on its merits. The Court also found that there had been no change in circumstances since the earlier application for recusal was made, and that the Court should determine the charge of contempt of its orders. The Court held that the contempt was proved and made an order for the defendant to be imprisoned for two months.

The Court found that the application for recusal was without merit and was an abuse of process. The Court held that the applicant's statement about the judges did not lead to an apprehension that the presiding judge might decide the case other than on its merits. The Court also found that the earlier motion on a different subject matter did not amount to findings of fact or credit findings, and that no matter had been determined on a final basis. The Court held that the application for transfer of proceedings for apprehended bias was also without merit, as there had been no change in circumstances since the earlier application was made. The Court held that the contempt was proved and made an order for the defendant to be imprisoned for two months. The Court emphasised the importance of the principle that courts should not be subjected to public criticism or disparagement, and that the applicant's conduct in this case was a serious breach of that principle.